In his latest commentary, renowned academic and columnist, Farooq Kperogi offers a provocative shift in his critique of the current Nigerian administration. In the article titled “Now I know Tinubu’s Policies Aren’t the Problem,” Kperogi argues that while the public often focuses on the technical merits or failures of specific economic directives, the true rot lies in the systemic lack of empathy and the disconnect between the ruling elite and the lived reality of the masses.

Kperogi contends that even “sound” economic policies those often championed by international financial institutions are doomed to fail in a climate of unchecked corruption and fiscal profligacy. He points out a jarring irony: while the government asks citizens to endure the “necessary pain” of subsidy removals and currency flotation, the political class continues to indulge in luxury, from multi-billion naira renovations to high-end vehicle acquisitions.

This, he suggests, creates a “crisis of legitimacy” that no policy framework can survive.

The article highlights a shift from debating macroeconomic data to observing the tangible suffering of Nigerians.

Kperogi suggests that the “problem” isn’t found in a spreadsheet of reforms, but in the execution and the environment into which they are launched. He argues that:

Trust is the Primary Currency: Without public trust, even the most theoretically sound policy becomes a tool of oppression.

Institutional Decay: Policies are being filtered through a “broken pipe” of bureaucratic inefficiency and self-interest, ensuring that the intended benefits never reach the grassroots.

Ultimately, Kperogi’s piece serves as a cautionary tale about “neoliberal fundamentalism” practiced in a vacuum of accountability. He concludes that the obsession with “reforms” acts as a smokescreen for the deeper, structural issues of Nigerian governance. By shifting the blame away from the policies themselves and toward the character and conduct of the leadership, Kperogi challenges his readers to look beyond the executive orders and focus on the fundamental lack of a “human-centered” approach to power.

This pivot in Kperogi’s rhetoric suggests that the debate is no longer about what is being done, but who is doing it and for whose benefit. The “problem,” in his view, is not a lack of economic vision, but a profound absence of moral and social alignment with the people being governed.